Home Main Category Second Amendment/Politics

TASERs will be gone in 5-10 years.

JasonMPDJasonMPD Senior MemberPosts: 6,557 Senior Member
This will stir a crap storm with WOW and his harem, but the TASER has been a vital tool in reducing injuries for police as well as suspects. My department alone saw a nearly 25-30% reduction in officer and suspect injury (while affecting arrest of violent suspects) over the last 10 years, until our TASER use policy began to mirror this court ruling. It's not backnon par with injury pre-TASER use. Our new chief is looking to now mirror it word for word, as it were.

http://ncja.ncdoj.gov/Armstrong-v-Village-of-Pinehurst.aspx

The TASER will be phased out if this line of case law progresses in the obvious manner it is. TASER International sought to invent and improve a technology that provided a viable and effective middle ground between a baton and a gun. They did. I've seen it in action dozens of times. Nine times by my own hand.

The TASER changed the playing field when dealing with resisting subjects:

1) When surrounded by several armed officers, a cornered suspect intent on grappling, fighting, or wielding a small bludgeon like a short piece of lumber, rock, or other hand-to-hand implement could be brought to heel with an brief incapacitation using a TASER and detained with no injury to anyone. The suspect's pride notwithstanding.

2) It provides officers outclassed in speed and agility to incapacitate subjects who run if they are quick on the draw. Officer's apprehensions went up thanks to the TASER. Fleeing felons and domestic abusers were less likely to evade capture at the immediate time of encounter.

3) Mentally ill subjects could be rendered motionless when attempting to run into traffic, train trestle, or leap from bridges. There's several videos online of cops doing exactly that.

4) Mano-a-mano encounters have officers the ability to incapacitate suspects who go from apparent compliance to aggression before the suspect can put hands on an officer.

5) The "shock and awe" of being Tased is often enough to overwhelm the senses of the subject after TASER exposure and leave him fearful of that experience, rendering him compliant. Only the most hardened criminals accustomed to the TASER don't fear it.

6) TASERs get more compliance with their threat of use than firearms do. Suspects KNOW when a cop could shoot them. That's simple. But the TASER used to be fair game from the moment a suspect said "no" and walked away. Apprehensions were more likely without fight or fuss.

But alas, our TASER policy practically mirrors the sentiments of the court decision I cited above. Soon it will to a tee. It will effectively remove TASER use for all suspect resistance except those acts that come so close to deadly force the decision-making will be blurred and hesitant. Physical violence, left unchecked, will progress to fears of grievous bodily harm far quicker than a TASER could be holstered in exchange for the sidearm. Hence, the best defense will be to make the sidearm ready in lieu of the TASER since it's permitted use so closely approaches the use of a sidearm. You don't hit the brakes 10 feet from the cliff face, you do it well before. The TASER became your main parachute canopy, the sidearm your reserve. Now you'll only have your reserve.

This WILL increase police shootings. I promise you. Not for unchecked fear, but necessity. Cops won't have an intermediate tool anymore. The baton is next. Just wait. Without a viable use of the TASER the baton will return as the intermediate weapon. Then everything on video will be a "Rodney King beating" until kangaroo courts severely limit its use, too.

Regressives wanted this. And their gonna get it. More injured suspects and cops to come.
“There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.” – Will Rogers

Replies

  • zorbazorba Senior Member Posts: 24,180 Senior Member
    JasonMPD wrote: »
    This WILL increase police shootings.

    Oh brother...

    You are correct, and that was what I thought before I even opened this thread.
    -Zorba, "The Veiled Male"

    "If you get it and didn't work for it, someone else worked for it and didn't get it..."
  • JasonMPDJasonMPD Senior Member Posts: 6,557 Senior Member
    cpj wrote: »
    Say we have a scene where an officer is struggling with El DuChay. Officer two shows up. Officer two tases El DuChay, and he quits fighting. His pride hurts, and he's got a couple owies from taser probes. . Good outcome.


    Now we have the same scene, but officer two clocks El DuChay in the noodle with a baton, splitting his head open and gives him a concussion. Or shoots him dead. Not as good of an outcome for all involved.

    I don't follow the logic.

    Agreed, even if a tad extreme. Say Officer 2 just baton strikes the suspect on the thigh several times and in his flailing ends up with a knee bashed in. Now suspect can't walk normally or needs invasive surgery. How is that better than a TASER?

    The court's logic defies good sense.
    “There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.” – Will Rogers
  • JasonMPDJasonMPD Senior Member Posts: 6,557 Senior Member
    cpj wrote: »
    Wonder how it will affect jails? I know folks who work in them, and tasers and mace are about their only option when the natives get restless.

    I've wondered this too. The court ruling isn't specific to street cops.
    “There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.” – Will Rogers
  • NCFUBARNCFUBAR Senior Member Posts: 4,324 Senior Member
    Its okay, LEOs don't need any tools to handle those intent on committing crimes up to hurt/killing people including the LEO. They only need their badge and voice to stop a criminal who doesn't care about the law. Around my area they took the Mag Lites ... then the PR-24s ... even a complaint was filed over the type gloves LEOs were wearing having hard poly guards for joints. Sorry, but if a LEO gives an order and they don't comply let 'me ride the lighting!
    “The further a society drifts from truth ... the more it will hate those who speak it."
    - George Orwell
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 27,457 Senior Member
    Odd ruling. Someone cranked up on PCP, 'spice', bath salts, methamphetamine, and some other stuff might not be fighting, but if they decide you're not going to lay a hand on them, then they will fight like crazy if you do, or try. And if they're on PCP then they can take a LOT of hits from a firearm before going down, unless it's a brain shot. About the only way to take them out short of shooting is to use a Taser to 'short circuit' them long enough to get cuffs on them.
      I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer”
    ― Douglas Adams
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,428 Senior Member
    It sounds like the judges need to do a few ride-alongs and demonstrate just exactly how to handle a non-compliant suspect. When I was teaching auto mechanics, an assistant principal with an attitude liked to sit in on my classes and ask dumb questions about the lesson plan I was teaching. After I started coaching some of my students to ask very technical questions when he was there so I could refer them to him for the answer, he quit doing that.
    Jerry
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 8,496 Senior Member
    It does make the mind reel.

    Cops AND SUSPECTS get hurt A LOT when officers go hands-on to bring resistant folks into custody. A taser can leave some bruising where you bounced off the pavement on your way down, which in the grand scheme of use-of-force is about as minimal as you can hope for. Regulating the taser to the point that it's preferable to break out the real bullets is ludicrous. You can argue whether or not getting your butt tased was the appropriate action for the police to take against you, but it will be your HEIRS who will make the argument against the buckshot through your thoracic cavity.:bang:
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
This discussion has been closed.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.

Advertisement